The author is a Forbes contributor. The opinions expressed are those of the writer.

Loading ...

Loading ...

This story appears in the {{article.article.magazine.pretty_date}} issue of {{article.article.magazine.pubName}}. Subscribe

The NFL's battle against the may be about more than protecting its reputation. The league also might be concerned with defending itself against possible lawsuits.

Last Thursday, the Times published a report that says the league omitted 100 concussions from a supposedly all-encompassing study from 1996-2001, which understated the risks of playing football. The next day, former Detroit Lions defensive lineman Tracy Scroggins, one of the roughly 5,000 ex-players who's already filed a concussion-related suit against the NFL, issued new litigation against the league. The class-action suit, which is open on behalf of all players who've suffered repeated head trauma while playing in the NFL and been preliminary diagnosed with CTE, claims the league actively tried to hide data and information from its players. In addition to the Times story, the lawsuit mentions the revelation from NFL executive Jeff Miller, who admitted recently in front of a congressional committee there's a link between football and CTE.

Last week, the New York Times called the NFL's concussion research "deeply flawed." (Photo by Justin Edmonds/Getty Images)

NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy told USA Today Sportshe expects Scroggins' case to be dismissed, because he's a part of the larger concussion settlement.

"The complaint is barred by the concussion litigation settlement and we expect it to be dismissed," McCarthy said. "Mr. Scroggins is a member of the settlement class and did not choose to opt out. He is eligible to pursue the benefits provided under the settlement agreement, but may not pursue any action in court, either on his own behalf or on behalf of other former players, more than 99 percent of whom have accepted the settlement."

Though the league may not think Scroggins' suit will get very far, it opens up the possibility that other players will follow his lead. It could also influence the three-judge panel that's reviewing the league's $1 billion concussion lawsuit, which is currently being appealed by some former players.

The NFL has roundly denounced the Times story, issuing a 2,500-word missive last week and sending over a letter to the paper Tuesday that demands a retraction. Most of the letter focuses on the Times' allegation that the NFL is tied in with the tobacco industry, but it also touches on the much-maligned study:

"The story is false and defamatory on this point as well. There is not a single fact in the Times article that supports the allegation that the NFL intentionally concealed concussion data in a manner "parallel to tobacco research," as the revised Times print headline asserts. To the contrary, the fact that the studies relied on a data set that was not a complete count of all concussions in the NFL –– the central factual assertion in the story –– was repeatedly and expressly disclosed in the studies themselves and counting all concussions was not the purpose of the studies in any event. Nor does the story explain why the allegedly "omitted" data were necessarily significant to the purpose of the studies or their results."

The Times issued a rebuttal of its own last week, saying studies and peer review did claim every player concussion reported from 1996-2001 was included in the NFL's report.

Rising league revenue indicates the NFL's concussion crisis hasn't harmed its bottom line. There's hardly any evidence the average sports fan cares about this issue. Concussion, the major motion picture starring Will Smith, only drew roughly $34.5 million at the box office in the United States despite being released on Christmas.

But if the Times story stands, it could lead to the league facing additional scrutiny in court. That's what this fight may truly be about.